# Big Brother compared to God



## Lorem Ipsum (Aug 5, 2009)

So, I've been thinking over the past few days. Why the hell do I maintain that I am a Christian? Well, it's because of the 'what if' factor. If I didn't believe in a God, then what would happen if there actually was one? Would I go to hell? It's that fear that keeps people's faiths, in my opinion. And so, I drew a comparison to Nineteen Eighty-Four, the excellent book by George Orwell. I thought, what are the differences between the Big Brother of the novel, who is the totalitarian dictator of Oceania, and the God that is the centre of most religions, under one alias or another.

Well, that was the basis for me telling myself that I was actually agnostic/atheist. Because, you see, they're one and the same. Look at it objectively. Big Brother is meant to be constantly watching you, always and unerringly watching your every action. Much in the same way that God is always watching you, always taking note of what you do, in preparation for Judgement Day. Big Brother is dressed up to be this all powerful person that defeated Emmanuel Goldstein and restored good to the world, much like God supposedly defeated Satan. And this word 'thoughtcrime' that crops up in Nineteen Eighty-Four -- is that not the equal of what people regard as sin in modern day faiths?

And it seems clearer now. How can you say that Big Brother is so wrong, pushing his and the Party's ideas onto the proles and Outer Party members by way of dictatorship and totalitarianism, when people believe in a God, who makes people afraid of his punishment and his damnation so that they follow the ways of his Bible and teachings. So God, like Big Brother, is a character created by humanity so that they would feel part of something, so that they wouldn't feel alone, as such.

What are your opinions on my reflections?


----------



## Aobaru (Aug 5, 2009)

Wonderful comparison, Lorem. I've never actually read all of _1984_, but I do know enough to know the central themes do line up perfectly with monotheistic (and even some polytheistic) faiths. Very well put.


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

Eh, nice comparison, but I'm not afraid of God, or at least not like that. I certainly don't maintain that the God I believe in would do anything so horrible as sending a person to an eternity of everlasting pain and suffering. Put simply, I don't believe in hell.

Now, I agree with you that most religions do the entire 'believe in God or you shall be punished' thing, but honestly, I don't think that's God's fault, just the people who run the religions.


----------



## Lorem Ipsum (Aug 5, 2009)

Aobaru said:
			
		

> Wonderful comparison, Lorem. I've never actually read all of 1984, but I do know enough to know the central themes do line up perfectly with monotheistic (and even some polytheistic) faiths. Very well put.


Thanks; it's surprising how strikingly similar religion and this particular example of dysotopia are if you look into it further.



Blastoise428 said:


> Eh, nice comparison, but I'm not afraid of God, or at least not like that. I certainly don't maintain that the God I believe in would do anything so horrible as sending a person to an eternity of everlasting pain and suffering. Put simply, I don't believe in hell.
> 
> Now, I agree with you that most religions do the entire 'believe in God or you shall be punished' thing, but honestly, I don't think that's God's fault, just the people who run the religions.


I'm afraid that I am going to have to disagree with you there. For the Bible itself states that Hell exists and that on Judgement Day, Jesus will throw all sinners into it.


			
				Matthew 25:41 said:
			
		

> Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.





			
				Revelation 21:8 said:
			
		

> But the fearful, and unbelieving ... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.


This demonstrates quite clearly that the Bible does mention Hell, and does mention that the people who don't believe in God will be cast into the "lake which burneth with fire and brimstone".


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

> I'm afraid that I am going to have to disagree with you there. For the Bible itself states that Hell exists and that on Judgement Day, Jesus will throw all sinners into it.


Yeah, but who says that I have to believe everything in the Bible? I take most of it as cautionary tales. I support evolution, not the Adam and Eve story, and the latter is in the Bible.

In short, I'm a Christian, but that just means (to me) that I believe in Jesus and God. Otherwise, I make up my own mind about what to believe, whether it's in the bible or not.

I guess you could say that I'm not very traditional.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 5, 2009)

Blastoise428 said:


> Yeah, but who says that I have to believe everything in the Bible? I take most of it as cautionary tales. I support evolution, not the Adam and Eve story, and the latter is in the Bible.
> 
> In short, I'm a Christian, but that just means (to me) that I believe in Jesus and God. Otherwise, I make up my own mind about what to believe, whether it's in the bible or not.
> 
> I guess you could say that I'm not very traditional.


What exactly defines you as a Christian, then?


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

I always thought that Christian = belief in Christ.


----------



## opaltiger (Aug 5, 2009)

Jesus is also a figure (although something of a supporting character) in Islamic mythology. Logically this means that Muslims believe in him. Yet they are not Christian.


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

Yes, but I believe in Christ as the _messiah_, whereas I'm pretty sure the Muslims think of him as a prophet. Belief in Jesus as Christ does not equal belief in Jesus.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 5, 2009)

But surely, everything you know about Jesus Christ comes from the Bible?


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

Well, yes. But the basics of the story seem plausible to me, whereas, say, an elderly man and his family collecting two of every single insect, mammal, bird, amphibian, and reptile is ridiculous in a physical sense.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 5, 2009)

Ah! Selective faith, huh? Good thing the basics of the story aren't ridiculous in a physical sense, at least.


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 5, 2009)

Well, a baby being born isn't ridiculous, and that's the physical part.


----------



## Aobaru (Aug 5, 2009)

The thing is, Jesus is described or mentioned in _other_ texts besides the Bible. I have no doubt that Jesus existed; it's only the Bible (Edit: specifically the New Testament) that makes him out to be the Messiah.

Noah, on the other hand, I'm quite sure is only a folk tale. Most religions have some sort of flood story where a man and his family gather plants and animals into a boat/ship/ark. For the Sumerians, it was Gilgamesh. For the Hindus, it's Manu. And for Christians and Jews, it's Noah.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 5, 2009)

Blastoise428 said:


> Well, a baby being born isn't ridiculous, and that's the physical part.


Oh! I agree, Jesus was born, if that's who you're talking about. I don't generally worship people because they were born, though.


----------



## Tarvos (Aug 5, 2009)

sounds like a mangled pascal's wager to me


----------



## Zuu (Aug 5, 2009)

Blastoise428 said:


> Well, a baby being born isn't ridiculous, and that's the physical part.


No, but a virgin birth is.


----------



## Doctor Jimmy (Aug 5, 2009)

Lorem Ipsum said:


> This demonstrates quite clearly that the Bible does mention Hell, and does mention that the people who don't believe in God will be cast into the "lake which burneth with fire and brimstone".


Oh no, God's going to throw me in a pit of fire! I'm so scared!



Music Dragon said:


> Ah! Selective faith, huh? Good thing the basics of the story aren't ridiculous in a physical sense, at least.


And this is why I quit being involved in the Church: why be Christian, if you're only going to believe what you want to believe? What's the point in that?

If we were in Oceania, all of you would be executed on sight. I would have a giant probe shoved up my ass, though, probably for their enjoyment.


----------



## Lucas₇₅₅ (Aug 6, 2009)

Since when does faith rely on morbid fear?


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 6, 2009)

> Oh! I agree, Jesus was born, if that's who you're talking about. I don't generally worship people because they were born, though.


Well, yes, but he's not a major part of my religion dur to the physical part. The 'God's son, saviour of the world' part falls under the, for lack of a better word, 'cosmic' part.

Jesus was both a human person and the son of God. I don't see a conflict between the two statements.



> No, but a virgin birth is.


Yes, well, the entire 'virgin birth' thing seemed sketchy to me, I think she, ahem, made it with Joseph and God did a little bit of messing about with it.



> Since when does faith rely on morbid fear?


Agreed


----------



## opaltiger (Aug 6, 2009)

> Yes, well, the entire 'virgin birth' thing seemed sketchy to me, I think she, ahem, made it with Joseph and God did a little bit of messing about with it.


So basically you're ignoring 90% of the Bible.

I don't think I understand what the other 10% has going for it.


----------



## Tarvos (Aug 6, 2009)

I do, but I'd be studying literature, not theology.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 6, 2009)

Blastoise said:


> Well, yes, but he's not a major part of my religion dur to the physical part. The 'God's son, saviour of the world' part falls under the, for lack of a better word, 'cosmic' part.


Well, sure, but why would you believe that he is the cosmic son of God when all the other tales of the Bible are apparently "ridiculous" or "sketchy"?


----------



## Saith (Aug 6, 2009)

'Cause he's a Christian?


----------



## Aobaru (Aug 6, 2009)

Music Dragon said:


> Well, sure, but why would you believe that he is the cosmic son of God when all the other tales of the Bible are apparently "ridiculous" or "sketchy"?


Thomas Paine actually points this out in "The Age of Reason". Basically, if one part of something has no credibility, we must assume that the other parts also have none. It's basic logic.


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 6, 2009)

Saith said:


> 'Cause he's a Christian?


Unfortunately, "I believe in Christ because I believe in Christ" is... not a good answer.


----------



## Saith (Aug 6, 2009)

Music Dragon said:


> Unfortunately, "I believe in Christ because I believe in Christ" is... not a good answer.


So, he still said it...


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 6, 2009)

> Well, sure, but why would you believe that he is the cosmic son of God when all the other tales of the Bible are apparently "ridiculous" or "sketchy"?


Because, a baby being born and going around preaching makes sense _logically_, whereas as Noah's Ark doesn't. Both of them are in the Bible, but only the former makes sense to me when taken literally.


----------



## Saith (Aug 7, 2009)

I think, maybe he just follows the messages in the Bible, you know, the ones that Jesus waas preaching about.


----------



## opaltiger (Aug 7, 2009)

Blastoise said:


> Because, a baby being born and going around preaching makes sense _logically_, whereas as Noah's Ark doesn't. Both of them are in the Bible, but only the former makes sense to me when taken literally.


Wait, and Jesus being the son of God and the Messiah, the second coming, rapture etc etc _does_ make sense?


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Aug 7, 2009)

Well, the 'Son of God' part has no bearing on the physical plausibility of the story. He's not the _genetic_ son of God, of course. Just in a non-physical sense.

I don't like the Repture thing is real, though. If the Earth comes to an end, it'll be through an asteroid or the Sun going supernova or something.


----------



## Zuu (Aug 7, 2009)

ITT: Christians who are one step away from being sensible people, but have unfortunately been brainwashed into believing obviously insensible hogwash


----------



## opaltiger (Aug 7, 2009)

So basically you think Jesus was this guy who preached about things that sound cool to you. They sound cool to me, too! He was totally a hippy.

I'm still not sure why the supernatural elements of his story should make sense and all the other supernatural elements in the Bible don't, though. Do you believe he was resurrected? Do you believe he will come again?


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 7, 2009)

What exactly sets Jesus apart from everyone else who goes around preaching?


----------



## Tarvos (Aug 7, 2009)

he preached 90% sensible things 10% supernatural hogwash, as opposed to the opposite proportions


----------



## Music Dragon (Aug 7, 2009)

Meh. Might as well worship Gandhi.


----------



## Tarvos (Aug 7, 2009)

It makes zero difference to me.


----------



## Vyraura (Aug 7, 2009)

If you do not believe in one part of the bible why should you believe other parts
they all have equal evidence, save for the existence of a few people mentioned, that other reliable historical accounts can verify did live (Pontius Pilat, probably Jesus, etc).


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Aug 7, 2009)

I think that believing in Christ and thinking what he said was sweet is coolio.
Like everyone I don't understand why you can't just follow what he said without thinking he was the son of God and not just a rad dude but I'm not a Christian.


----------



## Tarvos (Aug 7, 2009)

Vyraura said:


> If you do not believe in one part of the bible why should you believe other parts
> they all have equal evidence, save for the existence of a few people mentioned, that other reliable historical accounts can verify did live (Pontius Pilat, probably Jesus, etc).


because some parts are cool and other parts are just gay

bible's just mythology


----------



## Vyraura (Aug 7, 2009)

Well, that's basically what I was stating

'cause mythology can be cool but is obviously, as the name implies, a myth.


----------

